Posted on 01/06/2007 7:13:58 AM PST by Titanites
My apologies, brother. I misunderstood you. Thanks for the correction
Forgive me brother I should have expounded further on the differences in the two counsels. Jambia was Jewish, the early Church counsels were Christian.
You are a bit late.
***It wasn't***
Codex Vaticanus 4th century located in Rome. Missing Hebrews 9:14 - Revelation 22:21
Codex Sinaiticus 4th century located in London. Also contains Barnabas and Hermas. c. 340 AD
Codex Alexandrinus 5th century located in London. Also contains 1 & 2 Clement
Here is also a list of books that were in the OLD LATIN vulgate before Jerome.
Laodecians
Alexandrians
Shepherd
So, why is no one throwing a fit about these books being missing today?
How did you determine which books belong in the canon you use?
Who CARES if some texts, putatively a "bible" were collecting dust in some camel-mongers toilet?
***That is what King Jimmy did - and wasn't he a Saint and, as Scripture prophesied, Commissioned before the Foundation of the World (I forget which Prophet taught that)to rewrite the Word of God via His political pals.(politicians are THE most reliable authors of Scripture) - so, King Jimmy had his political flunkies, in the form of a "Committee" of "experts" rewrite the Word of God. Right****
The King James Version 1611
King James VI, king of Scotland for 36 years, succeeded Queen Elizabeth I in 1603 and became king James of England. While the Great Bible and the Bishop's Bible were the Authorized Versions, the masses were using the Geneva Bible. King James ordered "best learned from both universities," to make a neutral translation of the Bible with no notes, Calvinistic or Catholic, to be used instead of the Rheims-Doui and the Geneva. "and so the whole church to be bound unto it, and none other." It became the most loved Bible of the English language. 54 of the best Protestant and Catholic scholars were chosen on June 30, 1604; but only 47 names appear on the list of those who actually did the work. The translation was based on the Greek and Hebrew not on the Latin.
***Those books were NEVER part of the Canon.
Who CARES if some texts, putatively a "bible" were collecting dust in some camel-mongers toilet?***
They were all bound together in a book sometime in the 4th century, probably one of those Constantine ordered to be printed.
One could also think this (what you wrote above) of certain books not in the average English translation today.
***How did you determine which books belong in the canon you use?***
I looked to see what the preachers were using. They gave me one free.
But just to make sure, I did lots of research in my youth and middle age at the local Christian University library.
Now, I simply Google it.
There are thousands of old Bibles that date before 1000. As for one before the 4th Century, the number is limited because they were written on paper. Except in certain places, paper doesn't last that long. Vellum and parchment last a long while, but they were as expensive as carving in stone. BTW, collections of all Scripture in one volume were rare. Reflecting the fact that the Bible is a collection, and since the book of Isaiah, for instance was in the form of an actual book --or codex--that meant that families that had all the books were rare. The first mass production Bible, one that was about the size and weight of a modern Bible, was the Paris Bible, which was produced (in Latin) by the thousands in the 13th Century. Most of these passed into the hands of Domincan and Franciscan friars who used them to prepare sermons. They were small enough to fit into the pocket of a robe. Three hundred years before John Wesley, friars preached in town squares , often waving Bibles overhead for emphasis.
So, your preachers were the authority that the set the canon for you?
R U sure you have the right King?
Dr. Williams sounds a lot like that nut Peter Ruckman.
The Spirit of Truth is the Spirit of God, the Holy Spirit...The verses I posted in #77 are pretty clear about folks being indwelt with the Holy Spirit...
I am a little confused about your position...I thought Catholics were taught they were filled with the Holy Spirit at some point...I'm not sure at which point tho...But yet you say they (you) are not taught by the Spirit of Truth...
But then you guys drink the wine and eat the bread to get a dose of the 'real' presence of Jesus, albeit a temporary dose...
I (we) on the other hand, have a full dose of Jesus in the form of the Holy Spirit permanently, from here on out into eternity...
So that's one of the 'oddities' to me...Why go for the Eucharist to get the 'real' presence of Jesus when, if you're a born-again Christian, you already have the 'real' presence of Jesus before you partake of the wine and bread???
The Greek documents they used were all medieval copies. They also depended heavily on Erasmus' work which also depended on such copies. Erasmus, of course, did some fudging. Unable to find Greeks versions of some books, he filled the gap by translating the Vulgate into Greek. His publisher was lighting a fire under him to get him to finish before the Spaniards finished their five language version.
Full dose of Jesus? That means you are sinless, right?
***So, your preachers were the authority that the set the canon for you?***
Actually, it is what all the preachers here at that time were using.
In my specific instance I was able to use it and throw the scriptures back in their face and that is why I no longer go there.
The cannon had already been set in the first few centuries, but not perfectly as you can see from some of my other posts. There were still a few non-cannonical works getting into the Bible. Like Gold and silver tried in a furnace the dross was removed over the years.
*For the same reason baseball fans do not throw a fit when someone tells them, "Marv Thronberry is in the Hall of Fame"
*** Erasmus, of course, did some fudging.***
Who can forget Erasmus' bet which he lost and had to put this in his second edition.
1Jo 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
Ruckman and the Ruckmanites:
http://discernment.co.za/alert/Ruckmanite.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.